Models,fees,work

Models,fees,work

32 posts
28 Dec 2013
adapt
Photographer
adapt
Some models have said that they have not been getting any work...
I think that money is tight as many other photographers have said.
There will always be paid jobs for the explicit photos of models as there is a market for this which makes a lot of money,mags and paid websites.
For the more standard models who satisfy the keen photographers who just want to shoot nice photos,this is where the main problem lies, a few years ago their were many of these togs, but now far less, who want to commit large lumps of cash for one photoshoot which will not ever bring them any cash back.
Models have got used to 30/40/50 pounds an hour and in general these prices are just too high.
Think of the girl on the makeup counter who is earning £7 an hour and making money for the company employing her.
Do models really think they are worth 5 or 6 times this,when there isnt any markets for the photos,just the satisfaction the cameraman gets from seeing his latest shots, shot on his camera gear.
In the past I have paid models £120 an hour but this is when they are special in some way,a certain look or chosen by the client being exactly right for the commissioned shoot.All in all models should consider their rates very carefully..certainly photographers have too these days.

Posted 28 Dec 2013
IainT
Photographer
IainT
For most models of any standard there has to be a line or a rate, below which they say its simply not worth while.

As it stands, modelling is so low paid there are very few new models of any standard at all entering the business.

I think if you are a full time model who is tax registerd, then probably around £30 an hour is about the bare minimum.

Anything less and you are probably earning below minimum wage. Bare in mind that charging a photographer £30 an hour is not the same as earning £30 an hour, all things taken into consideration )travel, expenses, tax, national insurance etc, £30 an hour probably equates to "real" earnings of more like £8 an hour.



Posted 28 Dec 2013
pinkbuildingphotography
Photographer
pinkbuilding..
As with anything it depends on the market.

With prices depressed many people will stop working and then there will be a dearth of models.

Then the prices will increase until the market gets full again.

However the models that offer a quality service shall continue to get work.

Albeit this may not be at a rate that they like.

However models need to think along the lines that Iain has mentioned above.





Posted 28 Dec 2013
Edited by pinkbuildingphotography 28 Dec 2013
pinkbuildingphotography
Photographer
pinkbuilding..
IainT

For most models of any standard there has to be a line or a rate, below which they say its simply not worth while. As it stands, modelling is so low paid there are very few new models of any standard at all entering the business. I think if you are a full time model who is tax registerd, then probably around £30 an hour is about the bare minimum. Anything less and you are probably earning below minimum wage. Bare in mind that charging a photographer £30 an hour is not the same as earning £30 an hour, all things taken into consideration )travel, expenses, tax, national insurance etc, £30 an hour probably equates to "real" earnings of more like £8 an hour.


Photographers need to be realistic about models costs and be willing to pay this.

The result will be a lack of quality models as Iain has said. 



Posted 28 Dec 2013
Gerry99111
Photographer
Gerry99111
IainT

For most models of any standard there has to be a line or a rate, below which they say its simply not worth while. As it stands, modelling is so low paid there are very few new models of any standard at all entering the business.
snip 


+1
The problem is not models over charging, those who do are easy to ignore.

There is a distinct lack of new superb looking and great potential models coming in.

I think it is a combination of:
  • a downward pressure on rates - it is just not worth risking future careers any more by getting your kit off
  • flooding of the market with wannabie models
  • too many chancer photographers who pounce on any newbie who looks half decent
Being told that if you have any potential you need to drop rates further will just accelerate internet modelling into the low cost low value market
Posted 28 Dec 2013
Claypaws
Photographer
Claypaws
IainT
Anything less and you are probably earning below minimum wage. Bare in mind that charging a photographer £30 an hour is not the same as earning £30 an hour, all things taken into consideration )travel, expenses, tax, national insurance etc, £30 an hour probably equates to "real" earnings of more like £8 an hour.
Normal jobs in industry, commerce, retail etc are also subject to tax and NI. Salaries and hourly rates are not quoted net of tax and NI. Travel and expenses are also incurred in normal work though models and photographers do have more onerous travel and expenses than those in many other jobs. Also bear in mind that travel and expenses can be offset against tax, which does not make them free of course, but at least you do not pay them out of taxed income.
Posted 29 Dec 2013
Edited by Claypaws 28 Dec 2013
Gerry99111
Photographer
Gerry99111
Normal jobs, you don't have to do your own marketing. There is also such things as Employers NI that is paid direct. In normal jobs, you get paid an annual salary and it is up to the company to keep you busy. If you cannot get enough bookings one month, you will be drastically in debt.

Its only a short term career for most models but they will live with the implications for the rest of their days. I am all for keeping costs down but I would rather see some more great quality models appearing but that seems less likely whilst everything is in free fall.

Supply and demand dictates everything so all this comparison with other jobs [like what job are you even equating it to] is all pretty immaterial. and if you screw the rates of pay so low that no one any way decent will consider modelling, you will be left with all those that most would rather not shoot

Posted 29 Dec 2013
stu_art
Photographer
stu_art
It is a free market and models charge what they wish, if the market can withstand their fee, they will earn, if it can't, they won't!

As with all self-employed jobs, models like anyone else need to build into their rates, not just the shoot time, but costs of clothes, make-up, travel time etc. So if a two hour paid shoot requires travel time of an hour each way, plus an hour of prepartaion, and they charge £30.00 it is in fact only £60.00 for FIVE hours of 'time'. Plus within that £12.00 an hour there is a need for covering costs of 'materials' (clothes/make-up) and taxation.

Few will get to work every hour, every day, so probably need to earn sufficient from say 3-4 days work each week to live on!

The 'Studio Day' 8 x £40.00 looks good, but is probably only an opportunity for a few, perhaps once or twice a month if they migrate round the country (so incurring travel and accom costs).

Paying for models is why I am content to be a 'part-time' photographer, the day job earns me a decent living, which allows me to hire models (so allowing them a living too, which seems fair!).

Always curious how many photographers with day jobs, do 'free hours/days' for possible new employers, or those that promise to show case their work....

Posted 29 Dec 2013
mph
Photographer
mph
stu_art

It is a free market and models charge what they wish, if the market can withstand their fee, they will earn, if it can't, they won't! As with all self-employed jobs, models like anyone else need to build into their rates, not just the shoot time, but costs of clothes, make-up, travel time etc. So if a two hour paid shoot requires travel time of an hour each way, plus an hour of prepartaion, and they charge £30.00 it is in fact only £60.00 for FIVE hours of 'time'. Plus within that £12.00 an hour there is a need for covering costs of 'materials' (clothes/make-up) and taxation. Few will get to work every hour, every day, so probably need to earn sufficient from say 3-4 days work each week to live on!


Yes - the problem is not justifying the charge - it's justifying the cost to the photographer!
Posted 29 Dec 2013
Speaking from the point of view of a model (and in contrast to 99% of the 'working' models on this site, a male one!) I think there are a few points which need to be made...

Sites such as these are, when considered, a rather unique entity within an industry... where professionals and amateurs (whatever those definitions might mean) tout for business, be it paid, part paid, syndication, TFP, or whatever...

As such, what one individual considers reasonable 'compensation' for their services may seem very unreasonable to another.

In the original post it was said: 'Some models have said that they have not been getting any work'...

Presumably, these are the models who secure their work through sites such as this, rather than through an agency. As a full-time male model, I don't secure ANY paid work through sites like this (and never have done) - freelance photographers simply won't book males (but that is a topic for another thread).

Clearly, money is tight as was stated, and this does obviously impact on the volume of work available and the market rates paid within the 'freelance' market. But ultimately, whether times are good or times are bad, if one party doesn't wish to pay a certain rate, or another party doesn't wish to work for less than a certain rate, then the shoot won't happen... and that is business, no matter what vocation we choose...

The original post then went on to mention the fact that: 'there will always be paid jobs for explicit photos of models, as there is a market for this which makes a lot of money... mags and paid websites'.

The point that I would make here is that the vast majority of people shooting such images on a site like this are NOT actually taking such shots for commercial gains - they do it because (without putting a finer point on it) they like to photograph sexualised images of beautiful girls (and that is entirely their prerogative). IainT (who has already posted in this thread) is an obvious exception - he advertises for work on this site for his commercial enterprises.

The original post then stated: 'for the more standard models who satisfy the keen photographers (who just want to shoot nice photos) this is where the main problem lies...'.

The point being made seems to be that these standard models have set high prices during the good times (quoted at £30-£50 per hour), but now that the economy has taken a down turn, they haven't brought their rates down in accordance... and that they should have done.

What I would say is this... The term 'nice photos' doesn't give any indication as to the 'level' being shot, and I have seen some horrendously low rates for adult level work on this site and others over the years.

Furthermore, if you tried to cut the 'girl on the makeup counters' salary by 10% there would be uproar... but if you are seriously asking the model to do the same, are you really going to argue over £3 for an £30 an hour booking? If you're talking about cutting a models rate by more than 10% (which I doubt any union in the country would agree to!) what would the drop be?... 20%, 30%... 50%? I ask if anyone else out there would do that with their job?

Points have already been made in this thread about the short career span of a model, the 'costs' of being a freelance model, and the fact that they won't work every day (or every hour within a booked day)... so I won't repeat those comments, but it also has to be considered that modelling (nude, adult, sexualised) has huge implications on future careers... Many of the models on this site don't probably realise that, say, if they wanted to work with children in the future, or within a 'profession', they are in all probability barred from doing so (and I say that both as a former teacher and qualified barrister!).

I guess the bottom line is that if the casting is 'just for the satisfaction that the cameraman gets from seeing his latest shots, shot on his camera gear' then the photographer must either bow to the demands of the model who he wishes to book (who is shooting to earn a living, and risking far more), select a cheaper model, or shoot models who are prepared to work for TFP.

I would also add that if a photographer isn't happy with the rates being quoted by the girls on these freelance sites, then they could always approach an agency for a model - especially if it is 'commissioned work by a client'... but you and I both know, if you do that, you're going to be paying a whole lot more than what even the most expensive freelance girls charge.

The issue of fees is always a controversial one... but as I have said, it really is quite simple... if you believe that an individuals rate is too expensive, then book a cheaper alternative. As has been noted, there is a plethora of young girls swooning into this industry, and that's because of sites like this, the lack of a need for agency representation, and the proliferation of cheap cameras...

My only other advice would be... photograph a guy! (And that's to everyone out there!)



Posted 29 Dec 2013
Plymjack
Photographer
Plymjack
Not wishing to quibble with anyone but the girl on the Makeup Counter earning £7 a hour has to be tax and NI from that - so to say a model should earn £x and then add on her tax and NI is not a balanced argument.

Happy New Year to All

Posted 30 Dec 2013
Gerry99111
Photographer
Gerry99111
Not sure anyone did say that a model should add on tax and NI, it comes out of her gross payment.

What is fair to say is the girl on makeup earning £7 only pays employee tax and NI. Her Employer will pay the taxman direct for the extra Employer's NI contributions.

If you are self employed, there is no Employer and you have to pay a self employed rate so in reality you are comparing the models rate with a higher rate for the girl on the makeup counter to include Employers NI contributions

Posted 30 Dec 2013
StreetModel
Photographer
StreetModel
Gerry99111

Not sure anyone did say that a model should add on tax and NI, it comes out of her gross payment. What is fair to say is the girl on makeup earning £7 only pays employee tax and NI. Her Employer will pay the taxman direct for the extra Employer's NI contributions. If you are self employed, there is no Employer and you have to pay a self employed rate so in reality you are comparing the models rate with a higher rate for the girl on the makeup counter to include Employers NI contributions


However, the model expects her expenses to be paid, and expects to get the going rate from day 1 - the make-up girl has to pay her own travel, lunch, parking etc and gets paid more with experience - some of the new girls coming on here are asking the same (if not moer) than the models who have been here for years...

Posted 30 Dec 2013
IainT
Photographer
IainT
Ok...lets put it this way.

How many models do you know who rely entirely on photographic modelling who have a lifestyle which suggests they are earning more than a normal, living wage? Most, if the truth be told are in reality earning less per hour than they would working in a supermarket, even if the photographer is paying £25/£30 an hour.

Personally I can think of very few other than top European models. Most of the UK girls who earn decent money have sources of income other than internet photographic modelling.

The problem is that modelling rates are to low the result is the quality of model available is rapidly deteriorating because there is no incentive for high standard girls to come into modelling.

When I first started 8 years ago the better internet models were getting £40/£50 an hour for art nude level, and their main clientelle was amateurs, same as it is today. Even if things are tighter, the average amateur who can afford to pay £30 an hour could afford to pay £40/£50 an hour if that was the going rate

Its a self-propegating situation...the less people think they can get away with paying, the smaller the pool of good models becomes, at the moment there are far more "average girls who want to have their picture taken" than there are models and if rates continue to go south as costs go upwards, it will get to the stage that there are not even any average looking girls who want to get their photo taken left.

Posted 30 Dec 2013
Edited by IainT 30 Dec 2013
StreetModel
Photographer
StreetModel
I was with you, IainT, right up to the last paragraph. As a person who earns a living through photography (although not from model work), I class myself as one of the 'amateur photographers' on here. As such, the amount I have to spend on models has reduced overall, so it is not what I think I can get away with, but how much spare I have. It is going down, so the amount I spend goes down, so either the models charge less or I choose cheaper models.

There are models on here complaining about how their incomes have dropped over the last few years - well welcome to the club... When there was loads of money about, they were happy to take rich pickings at the top of the rates tree - now the pickings are slimmer, they have less income. I think that applies to most of us, and some people have no incomes at all now...

Posted 30 Dec 2013
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join